The Ghost Scene

In class we have been watching various interpretations of Shakespeare’s Hamlet via movie. Each one of the movies interprets the play differently and depicts certain situations in very different ways. The scene we have focused on specifically was that of the scene when Hamlet first speaks with the ghost of his father. We have seen three movie interpretations so far. Emotions, visual effects, mood, and settings were all factors in the differences between the films. The first film was directed by Franco Zeffirelli, the second was directed by Kenneth Branagh and the final film was directed by Michael Almareyda.

The first film by Franco Zeffirelli seems to specifically emphasize and essentially overuse the dramatic theme of the scene. The setting of the scene really affected this dramatic use. The scene was set on a medieval castle. It was a dark and gloomy knight and little lighting gave the scene a dark and shady mood. The ghost was pale with a light ghastly glow radiating from his body. He was also depicted as pail, ill, and aged. After the ghost reveals the true cause of his death, the pain, disbelief, and shock was clearly visible in Hamlet’s reaction. In comparison to the other two films, this one had the gloomiest mood and darkest setting and genre. The castle and dark setting greatly contributed to this along with the portrayal of Hamlet’s father. Everything about this film was very dramatic and really set a tone of eeriness for the play.

In the second film by Kenneth Branagh, was the most interesting and in my opinion the most effective depiction of the scene. This film version was very colorful and very different from the others. In this film, the director, Branagh, set the play in the foggy woods. He adds dramatic effect through the ghost’s voice. It is raspy and as he continues to speak it seems as though he is losing energy, strength, and it sounds as if he doesn’t have the breath to speak anymore. The smoke, fog and cracking ground in the forest they are in also adds dramatic effect. Hamlet’s reaction to the true cause of his father’s death in this play was much more compassionate and confused. He was more shocked than angry and this helped dull the overdramatic tone that the first film failed to do. The thing I found most interesting and the reason I found this film so interesting was its use of flashback. The flashbacks gave a greatly detailed depiction of how Hamlet’s father truly died. In turn, this made the play easier to understand, especially in the death of the ghost. It also made the play much more interesting and kept you looking for more.

In the final film version by Michael Almareyda, the play was turned into a modern day version. It was my least favorite version because to me it seemed to have the least amount of meaning due to the poorly depicted setting. It was set in a modern apartment building and no true eerie setting was depicted to help emphasize the situation as the other two films did. The emotional use and expression was mediocre in this play. Hamlet seems scared out of his mind when he gets the news of how his father truly died. His mouth drops and the way he talks he seems nervous and scared as if something bad is going to happen as he talks. The ghost was poorly depicted as just in a plain business suit. This film poorly expressed how the eeriness of the play should truly be depicted.

A few things I found interesting were all concerning the ghost. In film versions two and three, Branagh and Almareyda, both ghosts had depictions of the situation with the ear which was said to be the cause of death. In Branagh’s film the scene of an ear bleeding was used and in Almareyda’s version the ghost uses a handkerchief throughout the scene to repeatedly dab his ear as if it was bleeding. Another thing I found interesting was that in the actual play it is said that the ghost was wearing armor yet in all three films, only Branagh’s depicted the ghost in armor.