The BBC Television Shakespeare (TV Series) Hamlet, Prince of Denmark (1980) User Reviews

A very well-done Hamlet

[angelofvic · 9/10 · 25 November 2009]

Let's face it, there is no perfect production of Hamlet, it's simply far too long and varied and cerebral to get completely perfect across the board, especially what with the challenges of Elizabethan English and Shakespeare's abstruse dialogue. In any staging of it, there are bound to be certain moments, scenes, or intonations that one disagrees with. I've seen a lot of filmed Hamlet productions: Olivier, Gibson, Branagh, Scott, and now this BBC film with Jacobi. In terms of faithful, full-length productions, this one ranks up there with the very best.

Most Hamlet productions are drastically cut, because to perform the entire play takes a stage-time of four to five hours. This production appears to be complete -- that is, ALL of the original Shakespeare dialogue is intact -- and so it's essential for scholars and Shakespeare-lovers. And though the lines seemed rushed on rare occasion (for those less completely familiar with the text), for the most part the script is well-acted, well-spoken, and well-performed. Subtitles are available and very helpful, although upon occasion they lag slightly behind.

Jacobi does a quite admirable job with theatre's longest and most impossible role. I actually cried when Hamlet dies, and I don't think I've done that before. Patrick Stewart (as Claudius) and Claire Bloom (as Gertrude) are excellent, as are Lalla Ward (Ophelia) and David Robb (Laertes), and the rest of the very on-point cast. Sets are minimal, so we can thankfully concentrate on the play without distraction or attention paid to non-essentials.

At 3 hours and 45 minutes, this full-length Hamlet is a long haul to sit through, but again, if you want the real deal, it's 100% worth it, even if one needs to take an intermission for oneself. I highly recommend this production to all Shakespeare lovers and scholars.

The best full length Hamlet

[Doug-69 · 9/10 · 18 February 1999]

If you wish to see Shakespeare's masterpiece in its entirety, I suggest you find this BBC version. Indeed it is overlong at four and a half hours but Jacoby's performance as Hamlet and Patrick Stewart's as Claudius are well worth the effort.

It never ceases to amaze me how clear "Hamlet" is when you see it in its length and order as set down by the Bard. Every film version of "Hamlet" has tinkered with its structure. Olivier concentrated on Hamlet's indecision, Gibson on his passions. Jacoby is able to pull all of these aspects of Hamlet's character together with the aid of Shakespeare's full script.

Why does Hamlet not kill Claudius immediately? Hamlet says "I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious..." Hamlet is extremely upset, not only for his father's death (and suspected murder), or his mother's marriage to his uncle, but also, and mostly, because Claudius has usurped the throne belonging to Hamlet. He is furious at his mother for marrying Claudius (marriages between royal kin is not unknown; done for political reasons) but that her marriage solidified Claudius' claim to the throne before he could return from Wittenburg to claim it for himself. He is, therefore, impotent to do anything about it. And this is true even after he hears his father's ghost cry vengeance. He cannot simply kill the King or he will lose the throne in doing so. He must "out" the King's secret and here is the tragedy! At the moment Hamlet is successful in displaying Claudius' guilt in public, he has opportunity to kill him and does not. WHY? He wants it ALL! He wants revenge, the throne AND the damnation of Claudius' soul in hell. Hamlet OVERREACHES himself in classic tragic form. His own HUBRIS is his undoing. He kills Polonius thinking it is Claudius and the rest of the play spirals down to the final deaths of Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Ophelia, Laertes, Gertrude, Claudius and Hamlet himself.

Patrick Stewart's Claudius is a triumph

[Red-125 · 9/10 · 30 September 2013]

Hamlet, Prince of Denmark (1980) is a BBC video production, directed by Rodney Bennett. Between 1978 and 1985, the BBC produced all 37 of Shakespeare's plays for British television. They are now available on DVD.

This Hamlet was a studio production. BBC chose not to film on location, or to film a stage production. Instead, the director relied on generic sets that convey the sense, if not the details, of the setting of each scene. The decision worked well. We're not distracted from the drama by quirky, anachronistic details, or by the dramatic architecture of Elsinore Castle.

The principle actors are all highly skilled Shakespearean professionals--Derek Jacobi as Hamlet, Claire Bloom as Gertrude, and Patrick Stewart as Claudius.

Derek Jacobi was 42 years old when he starred in this production. (Shakespearean scholars disagree about Hamlet's age. Some argue that he was 30, but most believe that he was under 20.) Jacobi's age could have posed a problem, but his talent, and his lithe, youthful manner carried him through. Claire Bloom, at age 49, was so beautiful that you could believe that Claudius would murder a king in order to possess her. However, to my mind, the acting honors go to Patrick Stewart. His King Claudius is the embodiment of Machiavelli's Prince--ruthless, intelligent, and calm in a crisis. When Claudius speaks, people believe what he's telling them, even when he's lying. As portrayed by Stewart, Claudius is always acting--we never hear a sincere word from him except during his soliloquy. Stewart's performance is the best portrayal of Claudius that I've ever seen.

This was the only filmed Shakespearean performance by Lalla Ward, who played Ophelia. However, Ward's ethereal beauty and solid acting skills enabled her to keep pace with the veterans. (Dr. Who fans will recognize Ward as the actor who portrayed Romana II between 1979 and 1981.)

This movie presents us with good, solid Shakespeare. It's a very satisfying production, and definitely worth seeing. The BBC Shakespeare series was particularly popular for use in schools, colleges, and public libraries. The DVD's are expensive to purchase individually, although the boxed sets are reasonably priced. My suggestion is to check the DVD out of your local or college library, and treat yourself to over two hours of excellent Shakespeare.

The finest Hamlet

[jpendley · 10/10 · 4 January 2005]

I've seen various Hamlets, and I've taught the play. As I watch Jacobi, I'm tempted to think that he's every bit as intelligent as Hamlet himself, so alive is he to every nuance of this character's wit. He deepens, rather than solves, every puzzle regarding Hamlet's character. He illuminates line after line, word after word, shining light into this sparkling mind. At the same time, however, we cringe at the horror Hamlet feels at his betrayal--far more than with any other actor--because Jacobi feels the pain more profoundly than anyone else. And we shudder at Hamlet's own betrayals, because Jacobi is not afraid of the baseness to which Hamlet can descend. In short, Jacobi gives us Hamlet in full, and Hamlet in full is the greatest character in literature. That's why I'm satisfied that Jacobi's Hamlet is the finest performance I've seen by an actor.

In Many Ways the Best

[PseudoFritz · 1 March 2005]

No one production of "Hamlet" can completely satisfy except for the one that plays in your head as you read the play, but this is the extant version that comes closest for me (with one glaring exception).

Derek Jacobi is probably the best actor that I've seen play the role, although he's brittle and snappish in places (his first exchanges with Claudius and Gertrude, his comments to Polonius during the 'Rugged Pyrrhus' speech) where I think a mellower touch is called for. But on the whole it's a wonderful performance, and since Hamlet has almost half the lines in the whole play Jacobi himself is enough to strongly recommend the whole.

This Polonius is better than most, although not as funny as Hume Cronyn was. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are well played, straddling the difficult line between being friends to Hamlet and scoring points with the King. A fine, fiery Laertes, and an Ophelia that's no worse than any others (I've yet to see Ophelia played the way I feel she ought to be). Gertrude was adequate (I've also yet to see a compelling Gertrude, but I don't particularly know what I would suggest). It's also too bad that nobody seems to put any sense of spectacle into the Ghost's appearance any more; the Olivier film and the Burton stage production both give it an unworldliness that the Jacobi, Kline, Gibson and Hawk versions lack (although if I remember correctly Brian Blessed was well-used in the Brannagh film)...

The big drawback to this version is in the casting of Patrick Stewart as Claudius. The fault is not in his performance, which is worthy, but in the man himself. Granted, Claudius may not be as much of a toad as Hamlet thinks him to be, but his "natural gifts" should be poor compared to his murdered brother's. Stewart in fact HAS "the front of Jove himself; An eye like Mars, to threaten and command," which Claudius pointedly lacks. In short, Stewart is just too REGAL to play Claudius, the "king of shreds and patches". (And it's not just the father-and-son Hamlets that consider Claudius visibly inferior; Gertrude herself, when Hamlet makes her confront the two pictures, sees black and grained spots on her soul at the comparison.)

All in all, though, it's an excellent production.

The Best Hamlet Ever!

[divagal2000 · 10/10 · 6 September 2001]

I saw this version of Hamlet on television many years ago, and have seen every other version since, whether television or movie. However, this is the one that remains the truest depiction of the story for me. Most excellent Derek Jacobi made Hamlet *real* for me. Before I saw this version, Shakespeare was simply gibberish to me and I never tried to understand the Elizabethan English. Having seen Jacobi's Hamlet several times not only increased my knowledge of literature, but also that of my family. I promptly checked the play out of Library and read it, and poured over the accompanying recording. Jacobi's rendition attracted me to a deeper knowledge. And yet, I have been searing for a video of it for years and years to no avail. It gets a very high rating from viewers. Why, then, has it not been released on video? It's the only Hamlet that I'd invest in...

Best portrayal of Hamlet, bar none

[flowergirl1066 · 10/10 · 11 April 2001]

This production of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark is by far the best that I have seen. Although it may not have the production value of some of the more recent adaptations, it does have the most important element: Sir Derek Jacobi as Hamlet.

Jacobi's portrayal of the disturbed Prince is multi-layered and riveting. His displays of emotion swing from hatred to sorrow, love to vengefulness and everywhere else on the map, but without seeming forced or over-the-top. In fact, some of the more powerful sequences occur when he underplays them, with stillness, soft speech and thoughtful expression. As to whether or not he interprets Hamlet as mad or sane...well, you should decide for yourselves; I changed my mind more than once. At one point it seems he has thought himself sane and merely playing at madness, but suspects that he is actually mad after all...a revelation to himself, captured beautifully. Having performed the part of Hamlet on stage more times than any other actor in history, Jacobi's affinity for the role then comes as little surprise.

As for the production itself, it is presented as a kind of "filmed-copy" of the stage play, with little special effects or fancy camera work, minimal sets and no musical accompaniment to speak of. This production relies on the acting prowess of the cast, and the words of Shakespeare, to evoke the emotion and interest of its audience. And it works. The other players are top-notch as well, particularly Patrick Stewart's "Claudius" and Claire Bloom's "Gertrude." Together the cast present a seamless ensemble.

The last (but far from least) element that makes this production stand out is the play itself. Here it is presented in its entirety, a rarity on film. But, oddly enough, I never noticed the time. I was too busy getting caught up in the story. I suspect that you will, too.

The best of the Hamlets

[suegn · 10/10 · 7 January 2000]

I have seen all the film interpretations of Hamlet, from Sir Lawrence Olivier to Mel Gibson (gasp). Derek Jacobi captures the true essence of the character, from the beginning to the brutal climax. Superb acting all around. This one should not be missed.

The Doughnut Has A Hole In It

[tonstant viewer · 6/10 · 6 January 2007]

What a great play! Shakespeare really is more rich and detailed here than just about anywhere else.This particular production of Hamlet has great virtues. It also has a vacuum at the center that really kills it.

Eric Portman, who usually played mournful death's heads like Soames Forsyte, here plays the best Polonius I've ever seen - a man of gravity and wisdom floating off into dottiness. Claire Bloom as Gertrude is, as usual, faultless in Shakespeare, completely natural in both language and understanding. Patrick Allen is a restrained and powerful Ghost, thinning out his rich voice into a dry and austere insistence. Robert Swann brings warmth and dignity to Horatio.

That being said, there are problems. Patrick Stewart early in his career seems a bit lost, often setting the Indoor Iambic Pentameter Speed Record by simply gabbling his speeches at the expense of meaning.

Lalla Ward's Ophelia is acceptable in her Mad Scene, but not so in what leads up to it, where she enjoys being watched a little too much. David Robb's Laertes is OK when quiet, without resources at top volume.

Rodney Bennett, more at home with Dr. Who episodes, hasn't a clue about directing Shakespeare. Shot out of sequence in 8 days, the scenes lack emotional flow from one to the next, unusual in this BBC series. Patrick Stewart's hairpiece migrates distractingly up and down his pate, and Hamlet himself has two different haircuts. But the real problem is the star.

Derek Jacobi followed a West End run as Hamlet with a two-year tour that took him all over the UK and the Far East. Taped immediately after his return, this DVD shows him ossified and stale, gimmicky and unable or unwilling to scale his performance down for TV.

Hamlet's soliloquies are directed to the camera, which works only if we are addressed as individual viewers, not as a public gathering. Here they are overstated and wearisome.

Especially in the first half, Jacobi's performance is often trivial silliness, as one audience-tested piece of shtick follows another with trip-hammer inevitability. Hamlet's bawling during the Ghost's speech is mere scene-stealing, and his subsequent collapse in a fit is just awful to watch, like diving off the high board into an empty swimming pool. Hamlet's scene with Ophelia is remarkably vicious, the one with Gertrud genuinely distasteful. Only as events speed up to a final climax does Jacobi even begin to pull himself together.

Throughout, Derek Jacobi performs with one hand holding a mirror, so he can watch what he's doing. Worse, he likes what he sees. I presume this kind of calculation of effect can work on stage, but with a camera up his nose, it's unbearable.

This is probably why Sir Ian McKellan has made a screen career and Jacobi hasn't. A film or TV actor doesn't project to the audience, he lets the camera read his mind. Jacobi, by contrast, alternates between megaphone and sledgehammer. For me, Jacobi remains a superficial, inconsequential Hamlet compared to Olivier or Burton.

A strong director might have been able to bring all this under control, but that's not what happens here. A humane Polonius and genuine Gertrude can't compensate for a self-indulgent Hamlet, a tentative Claudius and a weak hand on the tiller.

The BBC is sitting on a 1964 Hamlet actually filmed at Elsinore Castle with Christopher Plummer, Robert Shaw, Michael Caine and Donald Sutherland. May we see that please?

Supreme

[oldgirl · 10/10 · 26 July 2003]

Absolutely the most thoughtful, spiritually deep, intense Hamlet ever done -- no other version comes close. Jacobi has the best understanding of the role of all the actors that have played it. Patrick Stewart's Claudius is ferocious and still sympathetic -- I particularly like the two doofuses playing Rosencranz and Guildenstern. Very feckless and yet sinister. Some might gripe about the need for a strong Ophelia -- she's not a strong person, that's the point, and Lalla Ward hits the proper nuances. Amazing. Simply Amazing -- every one of the more than two dozen times I've watched it.

My Favorite Hamlet

[CarrJL · 10/10 · 2 January 1999]

I have seen this play many times, from Olivier to Branagh, and this remains the one version that always stands out in my memory. Many actors have captured aspects of this character, but for me, it is always Derek Jacobi's performance they are compared to and all others just come up a bit short.

the gentle Hamlet

[didi-5 · 4 September 2003]

Derek Jacobi's idea of Hamlet is a dreamer, a plotter, a voyeur in the corrupt court of Denmark, and it is an interesting variation on other versions. The downside is the traditional costume so he's in tights, not the best idea, but these things can be ignored. Gertrude is the great Claire Bloom, who is excellent in this, while Patrick Stewart is a nasty-minded letch as Claudius. Lalla Ward from Dr Who is an ok Ophelia but not wonderful.

Aside from Jacobi there are two other great acting performances in this - Eric Porter is a busy Polonius, and Patrick Allen is a suitably sinister Ghost. The BBC staging is sparse, which suits this play very well and brings scenes such as Claudius praying, and Hamlet's scene with his mother, more intimate and effective.

Nothing rotten here

[TheLittleSongbird · 9/10 · 17 February 2019]

'Hamlet' is one of Shakespeare's most famous and most lauded plays, and one can see why with such memorable characters, some of the most deservedly famous in all literature, and text often quoted and referenced. It is a long play and not easy to perform at all, but the characterisation, language and complex emotions have always riveted me and it has always been one of my favourites from Shakespeare.

This 1980 production of 'Hamlet' is to me one of the better productions of the BBC Television Shakespeare series that ran from 1978 to 1985. Although not a consistent series (some did have budget and staging limitations, and not all the performances throughout the series worked), the BBC Television Shakespeare productions are truly fascinating. Mainly to see all of Shakespeare's plays adapted and performed in one series and to see them performed relatively faithfully generally with mostly good casts. One is spoilt for choice regarding available productions of 'Hamlet', with none of them being perfect but all of them have many great things to recommend about them. Consider BBC's version to be among the best in overall quality and something of a must watch if one is wanting to see a production that's faithful and feels complete.

With this 'Hamlet', there is nothing rotten and very little to protest about. If there was a weak link of the cast and of the production, from personal opinion Lalla Ward came over as somewhat stiff and bland as Ophelia.

Perhaps would have liked the spectacle of the ghost to have been spookier too.

On the other hand, on a visual level production values may not be lavish or grand, being quite sparse instead in the sets. But, considering that 'Hamlet' is a very dark play and with a location that is not specified in the text as a wondrous place (like 'The Tempest', that was an example of an under-budgeted production although it was still decent elsewhere), it was hardly inappropriate. They didn't always come over as ugly or tacky to me, apart from sometimes the hair, and served their purpose well. Considering that the budget wasn't a big one they could have been far worse. The camera work doesn't try to do too much or anything too fancy that it comes over as chaotic and has intimacy when needed, though it could have opened up more. The staging has emotion and dramatic tension, especially in the Hamlet/Gertrude scene and the brutal climax, and didn't feel too busy or static, having the right amount of momentum while being tasteful and cohesive at the same time.

Shakespeare's text shines through constantly, all the crucial famous lines and solliloquies having full impact and delivered beautifully. Apart from Ward, there is a lot to love about the performances. Derek Jacobi oozes authority and Hamlet's conflicted emotions are handled chillingly and touchingly. Do agree to some extent that Patrick Stewart was too regal somewhat as Claudius, but it is still an effectively calculating portrayal that doesn't fall into one-dimensional villainy. Claire Bloom nails all of Gertrude's many traits and characteristics, while Eric Porter's dignified Polonius is one of the best. David Robb brings fire and humanity to Laertes, Patrick Allen cuts a powerful, in a way that's both spooky and subtle, presence as the Ghost and Robert Swann's Horatio has a lot of warmth.

In summary, a couple of quibbles but excellent. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Derek Jacobi is amazing in this play.

[mary-hutchinson · 10/10 · 27 April 2006]

I have watched every version of this play that I can think of, including several on the stage, and Sir Derek Jacobi is absolutely the best Hamlet I have ever seen!

He has the most wonderful voice for stage acting, and his expressive face will take you on a roller coaster of emotions throughout this play. The way in which he delivers his lines takes you on a journey through madness. He (as Hamlet)can in an instant be loving, soft and gentle and in another instant be raging against the hell that is his life. You believe that he is in pain, you believe that he is angry, you believe that he is not a little mad. You believe he IS Hamlet.

Of course, some of the thanks obviously goes to Shakespeare, :) but without an excellent actor to get the words from the page to the stage, it doesn't really matter how well written a play is.

If you like Shakespeare, you absolutely must see this version. If you don't like Shakespeare, you absolutely must see this version. You will come away with a new appreciation for Shakespeare if you do. The nuanced performance that Sir Derek gives will leave you breathless.

Dreary and overlong costume drama

[alainenglish · 8/10 · 15 August 2007]

Part of the BBC filming of all of Shakespeare's classic plays, this version of Hamlet does nothing to dispel my particular impression that it is one of Shakespeare's most over-rated plays and Hamlet himself a not particularly moving and tragic character. I feel no sympathy for him, and I didn't after watching this.

Even when you have great actors like the great Derek Jacobi in the role of the Dane, and Patrick Stewart as Claudius and Jonathan Hyde as Rosencrantz, it cannot disguise the lack of passion in the storyline. And when a good actor like Jacobi injects passion into it, he renders the entire role incomprehensible. I just could not connect his physicalisation of the character to what he was saying, and this killed it for me. That said, he does get the "To be, or not to be" speech right, as his actions with a dagger make clear the character's suicidal intentions at that point in the play.

The supporting roles, to me better written and consequently better played, are enjoyable, notably Lalla Ward's loopy Ophelia and Stewart's well-detailed interpretation of Claudius.

At four and a half hours, it is very long and best watched in bite-sized chunks. Check it out if you're interested but be prepared for a long watch.

Wonderful!

[rosian · 10/10 · 16 January 2008]

I was never in the past interested in this play although love Shakespeare and have seen most of his plays now and enthusiastically studied some at school. Something about this story and all the fuss about it seemed to put me off. I never bothered to try to see Hamlet until fairly recently deciding I should at least try to watch it and I borrowed the Olivier version from the library. Well, I struggled with it. Olivier seemed far too old, not only in his looks but in his acting of the part. The play had been enormously cut to fit a more conventional movie length and I think must have missed out too much as I found it difficult to concentrate on it, soon became bored and annoyed by it. I still think Olivier's Henry V is the best version I've seen of that rousing play - tho' admit I haven't rewatched the Beeb version yet and can't recall how it was when first shown.

I heard of the Branagh full length version of Hamlet. Although I enjoyed his Much Ado, I think the Beeb version is far better and I wasn't entirely impressed by his Henry V. But I was off Branagh a bit after seeing his disappointing effort at a musical of Love's Labour's Lost which is a play I like and was so well made by the Beeb.

Finally acquiring the complete Beeb Shakespeare on DVD recently, I soon rewatched one of my most favourite Shakespeare plays, Richard II, and was simply enthralled by Jacobi in the part so was immediately persuaded to watch his Hamlet next. What a revelation this play now is for me! Yes, it is splendid, but I feel it needs an actor you can emphathise with to play Hamlet and this for me is Jacobi. Amazing. Intriguing to note that although he is older than I understand the character Hamlet was, it doesn't show whilst in Olivier it did. Now I note he's also in the Branagh version and had much to do with training Branagh, so I shall have to watch that to see what Jocobi does with Claudius! I'm interested to discover Jacobi has trained Branagh as yes, you can certainly see the influence.

And now I'm going to watch it all over again....

Hail to the King of Hamlets.

[timbasa77 · 9/10 · 14 January 2005]

Amazing, amazing, amazing. What more can be said? Jacobi is the best Hamlet ever to grace the stage and captures every inch of the character. Every nuance and element of Hamlet is depicted and depicted well. Some people have complained about his age, but you honestly cannot tell when watching the film. If anything, he looks drastically younger than 40. I only wish a more worthy Ophelia could have been found. Her acting is passable but she just doesn't look the part. The only real exceptional performances come from Jacobi and Stewart, who is a great Claudius. The rest of the cast is good, but Jacobi is what truly elevates this teleplay.

A Complete Hamlet, thanks God

[Dr_Coulardeau · 10/10 · 7 November 2010]

God be thanked one hundred thousand times, this Hamlet is not cut up and sliced down to a caricature. It is worth its nearly four hours and we can finally enjoy all the levels of that play. And first of all its wit. Numerous scenes, even the most dramatic, are adorned with gems of wit and jest, humor and fun. No subject is exempt and even death becomes a joke. At times a nostalgic joke, a joke nostalgic of a joke and a jester, like with the skull of Yorick.

This production of Hamlet sets an important emphasis on the use of folly, craziness, derangement to create the very tragic plot. We never know whether Hamlet, or Ophelia, or even Laertes are really mad or if they are playing mad. The play is very careful to play on both aspects and possibilities and to make the divide between the two nearly impossible to capture.

This production uses very well the potential of the play to make it a real event that can take the dimension of real life. The play in the play is a long episode in which the spectators are playing and the actors are watching and vice versa. Real life becomes the play and the play becomes the mirror of real life. It is so intricate that we wonder if Hamlet is not finding some balance in that juggling game. The play proves he did not find any balance but one supplementary reason to pursue his foolishness.

The main core of the play is of course emphasized by the presence of the full dress and adornments of the drama. The king appears all the more guilty when all the details are given, including his own doubts about what he has done, because he doubts he has been able to do it. That brings behind the play a force that is at work in human life all the time: the desire to conquer new territories, if possible from someone close to you. Man is a conqueror, a thief, a bandit, a highwayman, and especially against his own relatives, parents, ascendants and descendants. It is not so much a fight for power but a fight for control. It is not the survival instinct that is at work here but the instinct of possession that can only come with the dispossession of others who end up possessed by the devil of vengeance and the angel of insanity.

But the play emphasizes tremendously the nearly all male distribution. Only two female characters: the mother and queen who is the willing/unwilling accomplice of a crime, knows it and enjoys it because it keeps her on the throne. She is called all kinds of abusive names that she deserves from beginning to end. Ophelia is the second woman and she is both the center of the play but nothing but a prop used when necessary. The target of insults and verbal aggression from Hamlet. The illustration of female derangement finding its voice in the language of flowers. The dead suicidee in a tomb causing the anger of the clergy, the craze of her brother Laertes and the violent intervention of Hamlet. It is a play that rejects women as being at best the profiteers of what men are doing, and at worst their victims.

But this brings a whole different line of questioning. In that all-male universe what can happen? An all-male universe is a pot full of spiders and they have to kill one another to the last, and there is no survivor in the pot that will be taken over by a spider coming from outside when all the killing is done. Shakespeare adds to that the fact that this chaotic spider war is always started by some gross irregular action of one of these men to conquer the territory he does not control. The disruptive act here is double: the killing of a king by his own brother and the marrying of the widowed queen by this aforesaid brother. The first consequence is that the proper heir is rejected into some kind of death sooner or later to clear the way to the new usurping king.

The last characteristic is that the play is always bringing together men, friends and more friends and among all these friends there are some real friends and the play is quite careful not to introduce any ambiguity on that subject. The only real embrace between Hamlet and Horatio is when Hamlet is dying in Horatio's arms. This production is careful to disarm some of the wit that could be ambiguous with a wink or a small detail or inflection. Even the two traitors known as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern who are inseparable and are like direct gambling and night time pleasure revelers for Hamlet himself, those two with their obvious Jewish names, predestined names, one to be a death garland and the other nothing but a surface of gold to hide the rest, even them are nicely over-painted as cruel and uncaring people who are ready to take anyone, even their professed friends to the scaffold.

But, one more time, all this could not be if the play were reduced by one third as is the case in mot production. Our modern audiences are supposed to be in a hurry and they do not have four hours to spend for only one play, two maybe but not one.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne, University Paris 8 Saint Denis, University Paris 12 Créteil, CEGID

Definitely 'To be'!

[Tipu · 10 March 1999]

Havn't seen Branagh or Mel Gibson, & Olivier is a distant b&w teenage memory, but this is GOOD. The cast is awesome & lives upto its billing. Patrick Stewart is a great 'villain' (I havn't seen Conspiracy Theory, so I don't know how good a villain he is in movies), Claire Bloom is a sexy queen (she was one short of 50 when this was made, but very oomph). The sexual tension between she & Hamlet crackles. Stretches in between drag things down a bit (even Shakespeare was indecisive when he wrote it?) but the last hour is electrifying. As for Derek Jacobi, what do I say? Worth keeping the telly running for 4 hours.

Hamlet, Prince of Denmark

[eparis2 · 10/10 · 5 September 2022]

The BBC has presented a more complex and complete Hamlet than most filmmakers dare attempt. While alternative versions may provide a more spectacular and fantastic setting, Jacobi's Hamlet possesses the intelligence and clarity such an intricate and difficult character requires.

Notwithstanding talent such as Claire Bloom and Patrick Stewart, viewers are more likely to gravitate toward Jacobi's solar pull as the principal character, making satellites of his costars.

Stewart's Claudius is sometimes sympathetic for the audience, while simultaneously contemptuous toward his nephew-son.

Claire Bloom plays Gertrude with a grace and maturity often lacking in the part, while Ophelia is portrayed as a weak and submissive character - a sensible interpretive choice ignored by most performers.

Overall, Horatio and the ghost are the most off-key characters in this finely tuned orchestration.

My first Hamlet as a study in school.

[Bernie4444 · 10/10 · 1 December 2023]

This is a Shakespeare play about the prince of Denmark and tragedy surrounding the family. Many people want to say the prince Hamlet is indecision, yet he outmaneuvers just about everyone and has a depth of vision. Now watch as Hamlet discovers who killed the king, his father, and how he attempts to get his revenge.

Hamlet is played by Derek Jacobi who gets involved with other productions of hamlet and eventually gets to play Claudius in the Kenneth Branagh version.

However, I still have a place for all the BBC productions as they do not try to exonerate but sound like people talking instead of spitting at the audience. As with many Shakespeare plays the get permeated with the popular characters of the time. In this case, they may have been popular actors but where do you remember first seeing Claire Bloom or Patrick Stewart?

This is the version I studied in school when they were trying to point out language differences and subplots. Eventually, I found my copy as a supplement to a book.

I still today play it periodically to compare to the other versions. I think you will find it a very good version if you want to know what they are saying without having to read the screenplay.

The Best of the Best!

[Movie-ManDan · 10/10 · 21 December 2014]

William Shakespeare is the best playwright ever. Hamlet is the best play ever. Hamlet is also the best character ever. And the best performance of Hamlet to ever be captured on camera is in the epic adaptation. John Barrymore's Hamlet is the benchmark that is said to be the best performance on stage. But that was back in the 1920s. There is some footage of him as the Prince of Denmark, but it is too short and to quality is too bad for any justice to the role and to Barrymore. If there was more and better footage of Barrymore in the role, that would be the best ever filmed. Unfortunately, the best goes to Derek Jacobi: one of Great Britain's most underrated actors.

For anybody that does not know that plot of Hamlet, King Hamlet of Denmark has passed away and is being ignored, mainly by his brother Claudius (played here by Patrick Stewart) who has just assumed the crown. Melancholy and angry Prince Hamlet, (Jacobi) is visited by a ghost saying it is his father and that Claudius murdered him and he wants his to to avenge his death. Hamlet swears revenge, but circumstances may change.

Hamlet is the hardest character in history to play. He displays all emotions and his mindset constantly changes and there are many different interpretations of his character to make. In other words, there is no correct way of playing Hamlet, just as long as each trait is used in the correct places. So to play Hamlet the best is only playing him with accuracy. The best way of doing this is by using all emotions possible at equal proportions and all interpretations all rolled up into one. Derek Jacobi is the only and best one to do this. I bet any amount of money that this is the exact way that Shakespeare himself envisioned Hamlet. It was the way I envisioned him and the way my teachers taught him.

Hamlet is mad, sad, happy, witty, determined, philosophical, crazy, and frustrated, all of which constantly change. That is why Kenneth Branagh's 1996 version is such a disgrace. He does a terrible depiction and the other characters are terribly depicted too. The second best Hamlet on film was Laurence Olivier's 1948 adaptation. That is a dynamic and wonderful piece of film. What makes this better is that this is isn't condensed nearly as much and Jacobi goes farther off different ends. Olivier keeps a basis of a man not being able to make up his mind. He does hold all of Hamlet's traits evenly like Jacobi, but his basis (which is a widely agreed one) keeps him fairly grounded. Olivier is witty, but Jacobi is so witty that he's almost comical; Olivier is angry, but Jacobi becomes a monster. Jacobi doesn't really seem to have a basis for Hamlet. He might, but it may take several watches.

Aside from Hamlet, all other characters are very well portrayed. Hamlet is a play where all focus is on one character: Hamlet. It is really rare that a movie or play deserves a perfect score because of one performance. Jacobi deserves much higher than 100%.

well done

[info_08 · 10/10 · 25 September 2009]

1. I've seen Branaghs Hamlet: Branagh is too old, speaks frequently with a high pitched voice (unwillingly funny!) - not a convincing Hamlet, and his directors qualities - poor ! (see also much ado about nothing from Branagh - the funny parts of the dialogues have mostly been cut out not speaking of the directors mistakes in the dialogue cuts!) 2. I've seen Hamlet 2000: I think the scenario is an interesting idea - but such lousy actors - all of them 3. Orson Welles Hamlet is OK - but this BBC Hamlet is the best! Derec Jacobi is convincing - seems a bit of a lunatic - very suitable! and Patric Stewart - wonderful, and Claire Bloom is a very attractive queen. You believe those actors what they are saying - I think this is the best compliment.

Jacobi remains the most vulnerable, endearing, tormented, tragic Hamlet ever. Unfortunately production quality is old and a bit dusty but a must see regardless.

[mickman91-1 · 9/10 · 7 February 2022]

One of the better BBC Television Shakespeare adaptations, and actually one of the best versions of the great play full stop. Derek Jacobi remains my favourite Hamlet. Though he was fairly old at the time of making this, he is completely believable as the young Prince and portrays the full range of angst and torment and existential doom required for a complete performance of Hamlet. Some Prince Hamlet's can come across as petulant and annoying but Jacobi invokes so much pathos and is willing to make himself so vulnerable that you are fully invested in him and feel the tragedy of the conclusion in its totality. The pacing is quite slow and it isn't the most watchable version thanks to 40 year old low budget TV production quality, but Jacobi's performance renders it all forgivable. Other good performances include Patrick Stewart as Claudius.

A sexy Claudius

[gtimson · 10/10 · 20 July 2021]

Other user reviews here point out that the text of the play would have Claudius much more repellent than the young, sexy Patrick Stewart plays him. Two years younger, in real life, than Jacobi, his 'nephew'! But I found Stewart's Claudius to be fascinatingly convincing -- a worthy villain. After all, how did he manage to seduce Gertrude if he was the sneaky, ugly troll that Hamlet thinks him to be!

Every English-speaker in the world should see this imperishable masterpiece. And if you aren't quite fluent in Elizabethan, what a help the closed captioning is!