Google グループは Usenet の新規の投稿と購読のサポートを終了しました。過去のコンテンツは引き続き閲覧できます。
Dismiss

Fortinbras in Hamlet Film?

閲覧: 176 回
最初の未読メッセージにスキップ

John Wager

未読、
1996/02/28 3:00:001996/02/28
To:
I've been discussing Hobbes' LEVIATHAN and Hamlet with some students, and
have shown the endings of three films of Hamlet, all of which omit the
appearance of Fortinbras and the re-creation of a "sovereign" sparing the
state of Denmark from the civil war of "all against all."

In Mel Gibson's HAMLET, no Fortinbras; the drama ends on the personal level,
without any overt political resolution to the loss of the entire royal family.

In the 1965 Nicol Williamson version, the "individual" tragedy is even more
pronounced.

At least in the Olivier version, Horatio gets to order the body carried off, with
a combination of his own lines and a couple that Fortinbras should get. But
clearly Hortatio isn't going to be the next ruler, so the play again seems to end
on the purely personal level.

Do any of you know any decent filmed versions of Hamlet that include Fortinbras
re-entrance at the end? Sources for this?

Thanks.


Beabiz

未読、
1996/02/29 3:00:001996/02/29
To:
In article <4h2nqq$n...@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, jwa...@ibm.net (John
Wager) writes:

>Do any of you know any decent filmed versions of Hamlet that include
>Fortinbras
>re-entrance at the end? Sources for this?

The New York Shakespeare Festival HAMLET starring Kevin Kline includes
Fortinbras, and a number of the RSC/RSCish videos include him as well
(Derek Jacobi, etc.). None of these are actually films, though. They are
productions of the play shot for TV. And please, it is Franco
Zefferelli's movie, not Mel Gibson's.

Bit

Elizabeth D. Wells
Bea...@aol.com
Atlanta, GA

StephyBard

未読、
1996/02/29 3:00:001996/02/29
To:
In article <4h2nqq$n...@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, jwa...@ibm.net (John
Wager) writes:

>Do any of you know any decent filmed versions of Hamlet that include
>Fortinbras
>re-entrance at the end? Sources for this?

After doing my senior dissertation on these very same movies, I found no
others of any quality which included Fortinbras. However, it is rumored
that Kenneth Branagh's production (to be finished in mid-April and
released in December '96?) will be including Fortinbras. No idea what
exactly will be included though.

Stephanie Bell

Bruce McMenomy

未読、
1996/03/03 3:00:001996/03/03
To: mcmenomy
jwa...@ibm.net (John Wager) wrote:
>I've been discussing Hobbes' LEVIATHAN and Hamlet with some students, and
>have shown the endings of three films of Hamlet, all of which omit the
>appearance of Fortinbras and the re-creation of a "sovereign" sparing the
>state of Denmark from the civil war of "all against all."
>
>Do any of you know any decent filmed versions of Hamlet that include Fortinbras
>re-entrance at the end? Sources for this?

The BBC "Shakespeare's Plays" series, which is probably only available through
school systems and libraries, includes a fairly remarkable "Hamlet" --
I personally think it is the best I have seen anywhere -- with Derek
Jacobi at the top of his form in the title role, Patrick Stewart as a rather
slick and urbane (and oily) Claudius, Claire Bloom as Gertrude, and a raft
of other notable actors. Most of these productions were filmed very close
to uncut, though the different directors had different visions of where the
overall effort should lead. The resultant "Hamlet" is, not surprisingly,
very long. But Fortinbras is definitely there, with the late Ian Charleson
(I think) in the role. He plays the part rather coldly, but then one doesn't
really expect great warmth from it, does one? I did find the Ophelia there
rather disappointing: I never found an Ophelia that combined the appropriate
degrees of distraction and intensity until I saw Helena Bonham-Carter's part
in the Mel Gibson version. I thought the whole rather tiresome in its
preoccupation with the Oedipal theme, and Glenn Close (a talented actress)
was entirely wrong for the part of Gertrude. But the portrayal of Ophelia
was so near to perfect that, were there nothing else to commend it, it would
be worth watching.


Gene Lee

未読、
1996/03/03 3:00:001996/03/03
To:
Beabiz (bea...@aol.com) wrote:
: In article <4h2nqq$n...@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, jwa...@ibm.net (John
[....]
: >In Mel Gibson's HAMLET, no Fortinbras; the drama ends on the personal
[....]
: >At least in the Olivier version, Horatio gets to order the body carried
: >off, with

: And please, it is Franco Zefferelli's movie, not Mel Gibson's.

You pretentious clod. So I suppose it's perfectly acceptable to refer to
the "Olivier version."

?Gene

George T Amis

未読、
1996/03/03 3:00:001996/03/03
To:

In article <4hbd92$r...@decaxp.harvard.edu>,

Of course it's perfectly acceptable to refer to "the
Olivier version." Olivier directed it.

GTA


James Eason

未読、
1996/03/03 3:00:001996/03/03
To:
I should think the purpose of saying "Olivier's Hamlet" or "Gibson's
Hamlet" would be to identify it, not to laud the director (or the
actor). So why should it make any difference whether we say
"Zeffirelli's Hamlet" or "Mel Gibson's Hamlet", so long as we know what
we're talking about? (Not that I do, since I hadn't even heard that Mel
Gibson had played Hamlet. Sounds vaguely repulsive....)

Timothy Foley

未読、
1996/03/04 3:00:001996/03/04
To:
Gene Lee (gs...@husc7.harvard.edu) wrote:
: Beabiz (bea...@aol.com) wrote:
: : In article <4h2nqq$n...@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, jwa...@ibm.net (John
: [....]
: : >In Mel Gibson's HAMLET, no Fortinbras; the drama ends on the personal
: [....]
: : >At least in the Olivier version, Horatio gets to order the body carried
: : >off, with

: : And please, it is Franco Zefferelli's movie, not Mel Gibson's.

: You pretentious clod. So I suppose it's perfectly acceptable to refer to
: the "Olivier version."

: ?Gene

Uh... well I can at least see where both sides are coming from.
Olivier both starred in and directed his film version of 'Hamlet', while
Mel Gibson starred in the Franco Zefferelli. So even though it's much
easier just to refer to Mel, I guess Zefferelli is more honest and
Olivier is ubiquitous.

Beabiz

未読、
1996/03/04 3:00:001996/03/04
To:
In article <4hbq4o$c...@news.halcyon.com>, Bruce McMenomy
<mcme...@halcyon.com> writes:

> I never found an Ophelia that combined the appropriate
>degrees of distraction and intensity until I saw Helena Bonham-Carter's
part
>in the Mel Gibson version. I thought the whole rather tiresome in its
>preoccupation with the Oedipal theme, and Glenn Close (a talented
actress)
>was entirely wrong for the part of Gertrude. But the portrayal of
Ophelia
>was so near to perfect that, were there nothing else to commend it, it
would
>be worth watching.
>
>

I agree entirely. Bonham-Carter is something of a revelation in the role,
I think. But can you imagine if Winona Ryder had chosen to do it, instead
of EDWARD SCISSORHANDS?

Bit- who wonders if she will be yet again charged with pretentious
cloddism for flaming Winona Ryder

Beabiz

未読、
1996/03/04 3:00:001996/03/04
To:
In article <4hbd92$r...@decaxp.harvard.edu>, gs...@husc7.harvard.edu (Gene
Lee) writes:

>: And please, it is Franco Zefferelli's movie, not Mel Gibson's.
>
>You pretentious clod. So I suppose it's perfectly acceptable to refer to

>the "Olivier version."

But of course. He directed it as well as starred in it. As a
pretentious clod, however, I prefer to call it "Larry's version." The
best, though, is Harold Hecuba's HAMLET, set to the music of CARMEN. And
notice I do call it Hecuba's version, not Gilligan's.

Bit

新着メール 0 件