Anna G. Olivier v. Shakespeare

Anna G.'s Evaluation of Laurence Olivier's portrayal of Hamlet follows. Be sure to view her graphic organizer in the next post.

There were quite a few differences between Laurence Olivier’s Hamlet and Shakespeare’s original play. Some of them were major changes; others were a little more difficult to notice.

The directions for this assignment were right in saying “to appreciate the genius of his stagecraft, it is vital that you have the opportunity to experience Shakespeare firsthand.” Watching the film helped me understand what I read, and reading the play helped me understand what I watched. The two went perfectly hand in hand. When I read the text I could picture how actors would portray the scenes, but actually seeing it play out heightened the intensity and gravity of Shakespeare’s words.

It’s almost impossible to choose a favorite between Olivier’s portrayal of Hamlet and Shakespeare’s original play. However, if pressed to make a choice I would pick Shakespeare’s version because usually, in cases like this, the original is the better. Olivier was perfect for the part of Hamlet. In fact, I’m not sure I could picture anyone else in the part. However, the film script did not stick closely enough to the original for my liking. Scene 3 was placed in the middle of Scene 2 and the conflict with Fortinbras of Norway was completely left out. On the one hand, these changes added the extra dramatic effects that are usually wanted by movie audiences and made the film move more rapidly and flow more smoothly. On the other hand, Shakespeare’s play was completely swapped around, losing some of his dramatic effects that were written in. This is really the only reason I have for picking Shakespeare’s Hamlet over Olivier’s, because the two go so well together. To me, it’s almost like Shakespeare wrote the part of Hamlet with Laurence Olivier in mind, though they lived centuries apart.