Hamlet

Among the things I've discovered attempting to play Hamlet: he is an arrogant smart arse who delights in the sound of his own argument, never lets go by a chance to show how clever he is, refuses to suffer fools gladly, and runs rings around anyone he disagrees with. Anyone wondering why I was cast? Gordon, I respect that you see so many shows. And that you always make the effort to talk intelligently about them. And that you are hugely positive about the industry in general. But I do find some of what you say quite odd. And seeing as I have the afternoon off with nothing better to do, why not start getting into character a few hours early? And indeed, any discussion I can eke out of this thread is useful, as we only have tonight and two matinees to go, so I might as well get my money's worth out of this thread before we close. It's probably not considered 'kosher' to argue about a review of your own show. But when there are odd errors in the information, it tends to call into disrepute the credentials of the writer, which somewhat negates what good has been said. Someone actually in the show is in the best position to notice and draw attention to these oddities. I'll try to avoid any comment about the actual value judgements you have made, as I respect your right to express your opinion, favourable or not. And anyway, Hamlet would shoot first, and debate about what questions to ask later..! I know you have made the point previously that you claim to like leaving deliberate errors in the stuff you write (or just make stuff up), to see who's paying attention. While I smile at the eccentricity, I still don't believe it really helps the way your writing comes across. I certainly don't want to discourage you from continuing to write your prolific reviews - however, because you are so prolific and at the forefront of this website, I want to encourage the readers here to be intelligently critical and not to take everything you write as gospel. It firstly strikes me as odd that you praise us for passing on a full understanding of the script, yet you seem to display large gaps in your own understanding! And for a script that is SO well known, it hardly seems necessary to spend half your review reiterating it...yet the bits you DO say are often either incorrect or are assumptions taken from your knowledge of the script but nothing to do with our actual production! I'm sorry, but it is misleading to call it 'reviewing', unless you are noting what you actually saw in the particular show! 'It is the year 2000'...don't know where you got this from. We set it NOW, unless you are referring to the rather dated American soap themes (Dallas/Dynasty) which should therefore suggest early 80s. "In the royal castle at Elsinore in Denmark"...not in our production. We're in a wealthy corporation in a southern US state, possibly Texas. Laertes is not the father of Ophelia; he's returning from school not the wars; you've confused who says what to whom about Hamlet's feelings for Ophelia; Hamlet feigns madness, but THAT is his alibi...he is not feigning his anger or grief. "There is a Catholic versus Protestant theme" ....REALLY? That seems like a huge leap to me, and you can't slip that one in without providing some explanation! I certainly don't see it. Are you thinking of Romeo & Juliet? "Shakespeare had to hide any digs at the establishment"...while this may be true of some other plays, I don't know that I get this at all from his script of Hamlet. What event are you referring to here, or is it another guess? "The Rosencrantz and Guildernstern scene".... - is a part of the play which is entirely cut! You may have been referring to the joke reference to their names in the credits of the film Hamlet plays, but the scene you refer to has nothing to do with them...it's the play within a play known as 'The Mousetrap'. Forgive me for brutally listing these flaws, but they really stand out to anyone who vaguely knows anything about this famous script...and have little or nothing to do with our actual portrayal, which is what I'd prefer you write about. I don't get why you feel you should write so much about the script - and yet get it wrong. "An American 'deep south' accent' to hint at the strife between Norway and Denmark"...is that really what you interpreted? Considering that almost all the political references to that war have been cut in this production, that seems like another big reach. As we're actively trying to avoid the story of international strife, it seems strange you should read that as being our intention! If the accents need explaining, Shakespeare very often set his stories in far off places, usually Italy (Venice, Milan, Rome, Verona, etc) so the English could wonder and marvel at the crazy goings on of its inhabitants, and not be too critical of the heightened reality of it all. In a modern context that's just what we do looking at the crazy celebrities in America. So it makes sense to draw a parallel in the tumultuous personal story to the kind of goings on in an American soap opera. And while a modern audience might not relate to a Prince getting away with somewhat unstable behaviour, we can easily relate to seeing how rock star celebrities do so. Whether we achieved what we set out to do is a matter of opinion. I think some of the accents, including mine, are problematic. But it's a choice. I think you're quite right about the sexual politics of the play, though it is not such a controversial reading. Hamlet has often been explained by Freudian theory. Hamlet is fixated on his mother, both loving her and hating her too much, which explains why he is initially so resentful of his uncle, and also probably why he finds it so difficult to relate to Ophelia and other women. "Ophelia’s collapse into madness is superbly depicted with full emotions by Whitney Richards"....I totally agree. I love what she does in those scenes, and they make sense to me far more than I have seen in previous productions or films. "the director has chosen a woman to play Horatio – with great success"...again I totally agree. A female Horatio is one of the most interesting aspects of Stephen's interpretation. That, and the musical aspect throughout the show, are some of the things that interest me most about being in the production, and make me hope more people see it. Thanks, for your review, and all the opinions you offered. I hope you take my criticisms as they are intended, and feel free to make further comments should you see fit. To quote a line unfortunately cut in this production: "There is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so." All opinions welcome. All facts contested and debated! Cheers, Craiglet ~<8>-/====\---------