Hamlet Film Review Kenneth Branagh’s, 1996 film version of Shakespeare's Hamlet flourishes with a vigorous lead role of Hamlet played by Branagh himself. Branagh puts together a great adaption of Shakespeare's Hamlet as he stays fairly true to the text and makes it look absolutely authentic by having it filmed in Denmark at the magnificent Blenheim palace. Although this movie is quite long, it is full of surprises and will surely keep you interested with its compelling plot. The cinematography in this film at points is very good, however at points the scenes look poor and appear absolutely fake. Unlike most movies, this movie is shot in remarkable 65mm format which is considered epic photography, and is only used in special event venues.
The balcony scene in Franco Zeffirelli’s 1968 film, Romeo and Juliet, is more successful than the balcony scene in Baz Luhrmann’s 1996 film, Romeo + Juliet, in three main ways: the acting, the script, and the traditional setting. Zeffirelli was very clever with his casting of the innocent Leonard Whiting and Olivia Hussey. These actors were naturally true to their characters, mainly because of their lack of experience. It's truly believable that they are legitimately in love and feel the pain and suffering that the two lovers went through. Their dialogue is delivered in a way that appears natural, in contrast to the forced efforts of Leonardo DiCaprio in the 1996 version.
Similarities between the film and the play. B. The differences in the film. C. The differences in the play. D. In the play and the film of The Crucible, the added scenes in the film help to Understand the play in ways that reading it alone could not.
It seems strange that people in our time now, who dress and act in a contemporary fashion, would speak in such a way. It makes the movie very unbelievable. Therefore, Zeffirelli’s version of Romeo and Juliet is more authentic and convincing than Luhrmann’s version because of Zeffirelli’s use of costume and prop, set design and overall light atmosphere. To begin with, the first thing Zeffirelli did better than Luhrmann was the settings he created in the scene because he has old, worn out and historic places that fit
He is still thus in the movie, but is more whiny, and annoyingly so. Putnam, also, seems to have a personality change. In the play, his personality is not so domineering as in the movie, where he is bordering on psychotic. His role seems to be made larger and more significant in the movie, which presumably accounts for the change in character representation. Throughout reading Arthur Miller's play and watching the movie I have come to understand why we separate church and state.
300 might not be historically accurate, but a lot of special effects were added to this movie in purpose of adding a flavor to the screen and to keep the viewers of the movie entertained. The fight scenes are far from what you may call “historically accurate,” but that was Zack Snyder’s intention. 300 This movie will always be remembered, 300 is always going to have an important role in the history of cinematography right next to movies like Casablanca. I absolutely love the movie 300, a lot of film schools take advantage of the great methods that were used to make this movie and use them to teach their students about films. You can count on film schools using 300 as a means to teach film students for many years to come.
Tucci is incredibly creepy, weird, and awkward as Mr. Harvey and his interactions with people are some of the best parts of the movie. Ronan is also quite great as Susie Salmon, I feel she captured the innocence of the character but had the maturity to carry the movie. Peter Jackson did a great job casting actors. In the end I really enjoyed this movie. Jackson equally balanced the feelings of grief, anger, and even happiness and warmth into this movie.
Film Assignment: “The Secret Life of Bees” On the scale of 1-10, 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest, I would give this movie a rating of 8.5. This movie deserves this particular score because it manages to catch the audience’s attention and put them into the lives of the characters. Both the good and bad times. One of the two scenes that were well done was the scene when T. Ray came to the Boatwright house and lily opened the door and let him in. I feel like this scene was well done because highlights the maturity of lily by letting T. Ray and being able to stand up and speak for herself.
Due to the popularity of Hamlet, many versions of it have been made in film and theatre. The large amount of versions made means that each one is subject to the director’s interpretation of the text, and modifications are made to suit such interpretations. In comparing the three film versions that is shown, the third one, starring Kenneth Branaghh was probably most accurate. Kenneth Branagh’s version of Hamlet was very exact and followed the text very closely as in Shakespeare’s original version. This contrasts Mel Gibson’s version, which was heavily edited, with many parts of the text gone.
It is unique for most film directors to do so, but for this film Spike Lee used his actors in perfect roles. I liked how he based the movie in one block so the audience doesn’t get confused from the story. Using one block instead of multiple cities was cool because he used multiple races to detail the story. With multiple races comes problems with