Mel Gibson's HAMLET is a perfectly acceptable 1990s retelling of the Shakespeare play, eclipsed only by Kenneth Branagh's lavish 4-hour epic version that was later put out in 1996. I had the pleasure of seeing the Branagh film at the cinema back in the day, and it's still one of my favourite Shakespeare adaptations. By comparison, this version feels a little glum and subdued, although it's still perfectly watchable.
One of the things that stands out about this HAMLET is that it has a gloomy and grey look to it; the sort of film that makes you feel the chill while watching. It's set in a forbidding grey stone castle for the most part and feels a lot like both Polanski's MACBETH and IN THE NAME OF THE ROSE. Gibson is a good choice for lead and successfully captures the character's anguish and a descent into madness, while the supporting cast are all very good too with Alan Bates and Ian Holm particularly shining. The film has just the right running time and stages all of the big moments with relish, ending on a high note despite the tragedy of the situation.
One of the things that stands out about this HAMLET is that it has a gloomy and grey look to it; the sort of film that makes you feel the chill while watching. It's set in a forbidding grey stone castle for the most part and feels a lot like both Polanski's MACBETH and IN THE NAME OF THE ROSE. Gibson is a good choice for lead and successfully captures the character's anguish and a descent into madness, while the supporting cast are all very good too with Alan Bates and Ian Holm particularly shining. The film has just the right running time and stages all of the big moments with relish, ending on a high note despite the tragedy of the situation.