In answering the question, whether it is better to be a man of thought or of action I believe one must have thought in his actions, the two come hand in hand. It may be easier to just go through life without thinking before you act but this may lead you to foolish actions because in the moment we tend to think only of ourselves and our judgments become clouded. But when one thinks before he or she acts, they see the bigger picture and what is the wiser decision for the situation as a whole.
I personally, was amused when Hamlet hesitated to kill Claudius because all this time one might say he was mad. So why would he start thinking logically now? He had remembered what his father had said to him about his mission , and how Claudius took his father's life without having his sins repented. So yes, Hamlet was right for waiting and taking a step back to think about the situation. Why should he take the chance of allowing his uncle to go to heaven when his father is still struggling in between worlds? This scene is puzzling my mind when it comes to Claudius because I can't decipher whether he is truly looking for forgiveness or if he just knows that the end is near for him, because Hamlet is onto him, so he wants to repent.
Hamlet throughout the play has been in quest to avenge his father's death, because we later found out that his uncle truly was guilty of the murder. So with this he decided that he was going to kill Claudius in his father's name. Now It is up for controversy on whether it is right to take "an eye for eye" , or if two wrongs make a right. Who knows did Hamlet hesitate because he realized that this is not what he wants to do? It is possible that he rather see his uncle suffer in his own sins than have his blood on his hands.
How Pontius Pilate left it up to the people to decide Jesus' fate, then washed his hands. I now leave it up to Hamlet's true nature to show through his actions. Will he do the right thing by staying true to his father or do the right thing by not killing another.
Monday, May 11, 2015
Thursday, April 30, 2015
The Ghost Scene - Natalia's Analysis
When it came to reading anything in my life I have always created an image in my head on how I perceived it to be. After reading The Ghost Scene in Hamlet I had a certain image in mind. After watching the three different takes on the scene my image suddenly became obscure to me. I felt this way because I realized that my take on it or anything else for that matter can be something totally different than someone else's.
After viewing Zeffirelli's take on the scene I was left with an eerie, and dark feeling. He portrays these characteristics through his use of shadows, tone of voice, and lighting. The use of shadows was shown in the setting, how the building was just a cast of black and shape. The lighting on the character's faces really gave it that "ghostly" feel, how only one side of King Hamlet's face would be shown. The actors portrayed their parts well, and gave it a more realistic feel, especially when Hamlet raged with emotion after finding out about his uncle. The different series of emotion that Hamlet's character goes through can be hard to portray, I feel, so Zeffirelli did a great job in showing that. Out of the three scenes that we watched this was the one I could mostly relate to in my own take on it.
In watching Branagh's perception on the scene I noticed how different some people can portray the same thing. His scene was very quick paced and hard to follow with the constant change of the camera angle. It gave off an anxious feel as he ran into the forest, I might say it was a little over dramatic. I felt that his time setting in the 1800s was a little off as well. He used more color then Zeffirelli did, with the costumes and light. The ghost character in Branagh's take is a very debatable matter. For me it was not what I pictured at all. The character in his version was much creepier, and mystical, because the use of makeup, and tone of the actor's voice. I felt as though there was not much of a "father, son" moment, there wasn't any emotion between them. Hamlet's true emotions were not shown as much as it did in Zeffirelli's.
Almereyda's present take on the scene was interesting to analyze. The whole take on it was much more subtle, by the acting and directing of it all. I feel that there could've been something more to the characters, such as, giving the ghost a more mystical feel. The use of props and setting really pulled through for the over all take on his perception. I noticed the television and how it was playing a fire scene, I think it was foreshadowing destruction to come or the impending fear of it. Also I noticed that Hamlet's apartment was very messy which showed the signs of someone who is mourning. We are left with one big hug at the end of the scene giving us some sign of emotional relationship between the two characters.
Overall, watching and analyzing these three different takes on the scene expanded my whole "image" and opened it up to new thoughts.
After viewing Zeffirelli's take on the scene I was left with an eerie, and dark feeling. He portrays these characteristics through his use of shadows, tone of voice, and lighting. The use of shadows was shown in the setting, how the building was just a cast of black and shape. The lighting on the character's faces really gave it that "ghostly" feel, how only one side of King Hamlet's face would be shown. The actors portrayed their parts well, and gave it a more realistic feel, especially when Hamlet raged with emotion after finding out about his uncle. The different series of emotion that Hamlet's character goes through can be hard to portray, I feel, so Zeffirelli did a great job in showing that. Out of the three scenes that we watched this was the one I could mostly relate to in my own take on it.
In watching Branagh's perception on the scene I noticed how different some people can portray the same thing. His scene was very quick paced and hard to follow with the constant change of the camera angle. It gave off an anxious feel as he ran into the forest, I might say it was a little over dramatic. I felt that his time setting in the 1800s was a little off as well. He used more color then Zeffirelli did, with the costumes and light. The ghost character in Branagh's take is a very debatable matter. For me it was not what I pictured at all. The character in his version was much creepier, and mystical, because the use of makeup, and tone of the actor's voice. I felt as though there was not much of a "father, son" moment, there wasn't any emotion between them. Hamlet's true emotions were not shown as much as it did in Zeffirelli's.
Almereyda's present take on the scene was interesting to analyze. The whole take on it was much more subtle, by the acting and directing of it all. I feel that there could've been something more to the characters, such as, giving the ghost a more mystical feel. The use of props and setting really pulled through for the over all take on his perception. I noticed the television and how it was playing a fire scene, I think it was foreshadowing destruction to come or the impending fear of it. Also I noticed that Hamlet's apartment was very messy which showed the signs of someone who is mourning. We are left with one big hug at the end of the scene giving us some sign of emotional relationship between the two characters.
Overall, watching and analyzing these three different takes on the scene expanded my whole "image" and opened it up to new thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)